[Glass] debugging zinc server requests/responses with tode or GemTools

[Dale Henrichs]

Paul,

Thanks for the logs.

I see that you are running in 3.1.0.4 and I know that there were a fair
amount of process-related bug fixes in 3.1.0.5 ... the system should never
segv, but there were some segv issues that were fixed in 3.1.0.5 as well ...

I know that you've cleaned up the bugs that lead to the SEGV, but if you
see a SEGV in 3.1.0.5 we'll want to dig deeper ...

Dale


On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Paul DeBruicker <pdebruic at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Dale,
>
> At this point I'm not sure what the problem was that caused the SEGV.  I
> think its not the name conflict alone but also that the pre-existing
> process
> the new process was conflitctin with was stopped because of a dnu.  I'll
> send you the logs off list from when there was just a name conflict and
> when
> there was a dnu.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
> Dale Henrichs-3 wrote
> > I'm glad yuu were able to get moving forward again ... additional comment
> > below...
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Paul DeBruicker <
>
> > pdebruic@
>
> > >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi guys,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the feedback. I got it sorted out.
> >>
> >> Prior to seeing Marten's advice I changed
> >> ZnSingleThreadedServer>>#handleRequestProtected: to:
> >>
> >> ZnSingleThreadedServer>>#handleRequestProtected:
> >>  ^ self authenticateAndDelegateRequest: request
> >>
> >>
> >> Which bypassed Zinc's server error handling.  I then ran the server from
> >> within tODE but the session kept getting disconnected without doing
> >> anything.  The gem logs from when I was running the server in a Gem (on
> >> the
> >> same port as in tODE) and restarting it with daemontools showed:
> >>
> >> '(error 2719) process with this cache name already exists'
> >>
> >> which would cause a "Fatal Smalltalk Stack Underflow, SEGV in StackLimit
> >> page"
> >>
> >
> >  This is not right ... The "cache name already exists" error is being
> > generated in response to a call to System class>>cacheName: which was
> > added
> > to the seaside scripts so that the gems could be identified easily in vsd
> > ... probably should bullet proof, that call in the scripts, but a SEGV
> > should not be the result ... could I get the gemlog for the incident so
> > that I can report the bug with a little more detail?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dale
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Glass mailing list
>
> > Glass at .gemtalksystems
>
> > http://lists.gemtalksystems.com/mailman/listinfo/glass
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://forum.world.st/Glass-debugging-zinc-server-requests-responses-with-tode-or-GemTools-tp4738563p4738846.html
> Sent from the GLASS mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> Glass mailing list
> Glass at lists.gemtalksystems.com
> http://lists.gemtalksystems.com/mailman/listinfo/glass
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gemtalksystems.com/mailman/private/glass/attachments/20140123/a1b8105a/attachment-0001.html>